Bomani Jones Continues To Look Like A Fool Trying To Racialize Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson

Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson entered Sunday about even in the MVP race. By the evening, Allen had started to pull away. Jackson struggled mightily in a crucial divisional loss against the Steelers. Allen, on the other hand, handed the Chiefs their first loss in 11 months, thoroughly outplaying Patrick Mahomes.

Knowing this, former television host Bomani Jones tried to get in front of the conversation by pushing the idea that Allen is only in the MVP conversation because of favoritism from the media. Jones spent about two hours on X trying to belittle the Josh Allen for MVP talk:

Yeah …

Readers might wonder why Bomani cares so much and why he is so invested in opposing Allen's success. The simple answer is that Jones' entire media existence revolves around arguing in favor of black athletes and against white athletes. He has tried for several seasons now to make a race war out of the Josh Allen vs. Lamar Jackson debate, hoping it'd catch fire like Caitlin Clark vs. Angel Reese.

In doing so, Bomani has repeatedly accused the media of favoring Josh Allen because he is white and targeting Jackson because he is black. However, both arguments are meritless. 

Jackson has his own personal advocates on-air in Ryan Clark, Robert Griffin III, Chris Canty, and Elle Duncan. Even Jones' good pal Nick Wright, an avowed left-wing culture warrior, acknowledged how the media is "allergic" to criticizing Jackson. 

"Lamar Jackson was so unfairly maligned at the beginning of his career, that now folks have an allergy to treating him the way we treat Aaron Judge," Wright told Dan Patrick last week. "Unbelievable, remarkable, historic regular-season player, who it’s not that he’s not the same in the playoffs, every single year is his absolute worst in the playoffs. Every athlete of my lifetime that has fit that profile is treated with heavy, heavy skepticism, except for Lamar."

Other than Aaron Rodgers, no player in the NFL is criticized more than Josh Allen. Heck, ESPN analyst Domonique Foxworth admitted on-air that he "roots for Josh Allen to fail." Mike Greenberg discussed the unfair criticism against Allen last year, in the following feature: 

"We focus more on the one bad play Josh Allen makes every week than the 60 that almost no one else in history possibly could. His team would be so bad if they didn’t ask him to do absolutely everything. He is the most unfairly judged player in the NFL."

Those pesky facts, they sure are inconvenient.

Further, Bomani's argument was proved particularly false in the postseason last year. Both Allen and Jackson lost in back-to-back weeks at home against the eventual Super Bowl champion-winning Chiefs and their vaunted defense. 

Allen played quite well. He scored three total touchdowns and put his team in position to tie the game in the final minutes. Unfortunately, the team's kicker missed a 44-yard field goal. Meanwhile, Jackson didn't play well against the Chiefs in the AFC Championship. He led his team to only 10 points. He threw into triple coverage late in the 4th quarter, costing his team a trip to the Super Bowl.

And yet, the likes of Stephen A. Smith, Shannon Sharpe, Colin Cowherd, Damien Woody, and Marcus Spears crucified Allen for the loss – saying he "cannot get past the Chiefs" – and defended Jackson – reminding viewers some great quarterbacks don't win Super Bowls.

Oh. Got it.

Bomani is right that race plays a role in the disparate coverage of Allen and Jackson. But it's the truth is the inverse of how he explains it.

See, sports talk is increasingly made up of former athletes, particularly black former athletes. As Ryan Clark admitted, they see Jackson as "the first true authentic black quarterback." They see Allen as the top white quarterback in a league where most of the other best players at the position are now black.

Josh Allen is an easy target. Lamar Jackson is a sacred cow. Bomani knows that. But he's a grifter, a race grifter. And his niche audience of racially grieved sports fans buy it.

But his audience must not be all that bright.

On Monday, Jones argued on his podcast that Jackson proved he was "still the MVP" on Sunday because, despite playing poorly early, he showed up late when it mattered, despite still losing. Uh, what? To muck it up even more, Jones then discredited Allen for only playing "good" until late, when he led his team to victory over the Chiefs. 

How does any of that make sense? Put simply, it doesn't. But when your audience already dislikes Allen and likes Jackson for their respective skin colors, facts be damned.

As for the actual debate about which quarterback is better, Allen and Jackson often find themselves in the same position: losing to the Chiefs in the playoffs. Jackson has the edge in the regular season with two league MVPs. Allen has a clear advantage in postseason play. Jackson is 2-4 in the playoffs. His passer rating is 75.7. He has thrown six touchdowns with six interceptions. He has completed less than 60 percent of his passes. Allen is 6-6. His passer rating is 100.0. He's thrown 21 touchdowns to just four interceptions. He has completed 65 percent of his passes.

We know, there's no fun in objectivity.

Finally, one can't help but take amusement at Bomani Jones's criticism of what television shows discuss in the A-block. He had two television shows of his own, one on ESPN and one on HBO. They both failed. They failed because, whether it's on X or television, Bomani's perpetually desperate attempts to racialize the discussions around players like Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson make him look like a buffoon.